#and assume this is an attack on trans women for some reason

[v4mpyyr-exe]

DONT LIKE, REBLOG

so people who do this may see it.

The growing problem of "they" for trans people

Something I've noticed growing more common in my life recently has been people using exclusively "they" when referring to binary trans people who don't use "they"

Why is this a problem?

Using "they" when referring to someone when you don't know is seen as "better" in a lot of spaces now, which I can agree with as you don't know what their actual pronouns are. The problem I've noticed is that when meeting a trans person, a lot of people seem to default to "they" even after being told what pronouns they actually prefer. This can be for a lot of reasons, but the most common ones I hear are "I didn't want to assume" and "its not misgendering, they is neutral!"

Example situation

Person A meets person B, a trans woman. A doesn't know B's pronouns and so refers to B as "they." B corrects A, saying she prefers "she," but A continues to say "they" because its gender neutral. However, A does not do the same to cis women.

Do you see the problem now?

The use of exclusively "they" on trans people but not cis people, no matter your excuse, shows that you don't really see them as what they identify as and is quite transphobic since you're literally ignoring their identity and not seeing them as how they want to be seen.

"Okay, what should I do?"

Simple, just ask them their pronouns and then ACTUALLY USE THEM!! If he says he, DONT USE EXCLUSIVELY THEY! If she says she, DONT USE EXCLUSIVELY THEY! If they say they, well. yeah, use they, obviously. If xe say neopronouns and you don't know how to use those, just ask! If any part of someone's identity confuses you, just fucking ask them instead of assuming, for the love of god, and once they tell you, don't ignore what they said.

That's all. Just please stop calling people who don't use "they" by that.

Edit:

I got this comment and thought I should clarify and add on some MORE things you should avoid doing now that this post has aged a bit, and I've had more time to think!

Please do not attack this person, i dont think they meant it in any bad way

Clarification on the term 'misgendering'

While yes, 'gender' does not directly tell you someones pronouns or what terms they're comfortable with, but misgendering doesn't only mean calling a man a woman or a woman a man. Misgendering is usually thought to only mean using a trans person's assigned sexs' pronouns or deadnaming, but it's actually more than just that, it includes what terms you use for them, how you group them, and what societal expectations you put onto them based on their assigned sex, not just their gender.

Other things you should avoid

* These DO NOT apply to every situation! These are just general rules UNTIL YOU KNOW THE PERSON, then do what they ask

Calling all gender non-conforming people 'it' (again..not. universal.)

Deadnaming, obviously

Using gendered pronouns for a non-conforming person

Arguing with someone over the validity of their identity

Automatically introducing someone as trans

Assuming someone is out to other family or friends

Using incorrectly gendered terms, including when referring to a group

Exclusively using gender neutral terms/compliments

[princesserica84]

Howdy, let me start off with no hate for you just here trying to help clear up a few things it seems from your post you dont know which is normal since you no a US citizen. again just trying to help you understand not an attack just trying help. 1 on the whole nazi wave https://www.tumblr.com/busterballsblog/773398848248987648?source=share also post is not the full clip here https://youtu.be/5e5Dz2EvuOY?si=NPvB0sq5Qjk2NHDK these should help you better see the whole story and facts. 2 UK, CA, GR,FR all have hate speech as a legal thing in the USA its already been ruled by highest court and even liberal judges agreed no such thing as hate speech in this USA. where each of the nations i listed have jailed people based on their words some where even jokes on stage. but in USA we have the right to say anything but a DIRECT call to action. but just as we each have the right of free speech means all sides have a voice to say as they wish. something that very different our rights listed out in black and white cant be taken away by government for any reason where yours and UK, FR and GR can and have been in name of "Greater Good". in USA its about the 1 not the Greater Good when it comes to rights. 3 on whole trans topic here the the issue its illegal to force someone to talk a set way in the usa. just as your name is Erica you cant force people to call you that they can say HEY YOU or they can call you E all they want and no law is broken in the USA. next part of this is wanting tax payers to fund trans medical issues that are not life threatening is not our way not because they trans but because they have no right to my money. also their proof this has been forced on kids ie people under 18 which is in fact grounds to remove and sue a teacher for forcing their views on kids at school. 4 you clearly listen to USA media well do you know that ABC , NBC, CNN , MSNBC all paid out 100s of millions of dollars in just 3 lawsuits for openly lied about the story and people in it. ABC even had pay Trump 15 million for a lie they told about Trump. so frankly trusting them is not really an option even for liberals have had to admit they wrong. 5 you bring up removing of rights https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript please take a look at our rights and can you link abortions to any right you see listed. ( i am assuming this is right you talking about due to your words. mind you while your looking at our rights look at 2A and then notice how liberals seek to remove rights on guns. i use this as example of how the very view that the right seeks to take away rights is not based in any logic and in fact the left is seeking to remove a right openly. again i hope this helps you understand our system in a fair and balanced way. btw i been from quebec to toronto i will say being that im Texan i understand qubec people the best in CA i have a number of pals up their and yea. to give you idea why people like me love your snow is my city just got 3 inches of snow that all the snow we gotten since 2018 and my summers are 110 F or in the 40s C in the shade with 100% humidity. anyway hope this helps you understand better again no hate just trying to help and i will leave you with how Texans see the rest of north America LOL hope you enjoy the fun joke again no hate just trying help you smile. and if you have any question here or DM me is fine just trying share some help.

^^ I give you, the American education system

Look, I disagree with everything you are saying.

If you want to talk about taking rights away, I'll give you this. A lot of pregnant women have died recently because the hospitals are not able to perform abortions. Today, there was a school shooting in Nashville that killed a 17 year old and injured another. If abortions were legal, and you have gun laws in place that weren't written in the 17th century, many people would still be alive. This isn't opinion, this is fact.

Deaths in Canada caused by guns in 2023: less than 300

Deaths in USA caused by guns in 2023: over 43,000

There's honestly too much wrong with your entire message. I don't think I'm the right person to respond so I will leave it to everyone else.

Also, just so you are aware, your "map" did not make me laugh. It offends me. Canada is my home and I would much rather live here (with free healthcare, gun laws that weren't written over 200 years ago, the right for me to make a decision on my own body, and a place where my transgender friends are free to be who they are) than live in fucking texas.

[abearinthewoods]

have you considered that bell hooks was simply... wrong? what has bell hooks feminism achieved for women?

Emma Watson tried to be a good girl feminist with the #HeForShe "male friendly" feminism clownery years ago and what do men do today? they make memes about her wrinkled forehead on how she "hit the wall" and no one cares. its one sided

also i like how "feminism" is too loaded a term for you but not "mra"

only reason people hate trans men is because they see them as female anyway... esp the incel trans women who hate on them out of jealousy, its misogyny not misandry.. ijbol stop trying to trick women into being your little knights.

also i like how "feminism" is too loaded a term for you but not "mra"

If people tolerated misogyny from mras to the level they tolerate misandry from feminists i'd think MRA was too loaded of a term.

MRA gets a pass because they are the under dogs. there is more recognition of feminist ideals and talking points among systems of authority (HR, School policies, etc) then MRA ideals.

A single feminist (Mary Koss) was able to set the direction of rape studies for over 20 years to exclude the ~80% of male rape victims who were raped by women such that large parts of society still today think the gender breakdown of rape victims is 90:10 and not 60:40.

When MRAs get the power to do that to women you get to make that comparison.

Also people attack the MRA term as a means to dismiss ALL pro-male advocacy. If this wasn't true you wouldn't see feminism-for-men feminists getting called MRAs as a derogatorily remark all the time. Advocating for men while female wouldn't get you called a pick-me. But the ideals about MRAs are just an excuse used to shut down any and all advocacy for men.

This is why trans men have to deal with the same accusations of being misogynistic MRAs based on nothing other then they said some pro-(trans) men.

have you considered that bell hooks was simply… wrong?

I'm not qualified to properly tell you off for this remark, could you ask this of @doberbutts please.

Emma Watson tried to be a good girl feminist with the #HeForShe "male friendly" feminism clownery years ago

Cute. This was the exact kind of feminism i've spoken out against: "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." HeForShe played on chivalric ideals of men being expected to go out their way for women's benefit based on nothing more than their gender. You can not get rid of sexism by using sexism. You can not get rid of the patriarchy by using the patriarchy, you can not stamp out toxic masculinity by using toxic masculinity.

Male inclusive gender equality is about calling out chivalry as sexist against men, not just sexist against women.

Male inclusive gender equality is not saying "of course feminists know the patriarchy hurts men too" to shutdown men who try to emotionally vent or debrief about people they have met who pretend otherwise and that men have no issues and thus if they complain about anything they must be sheltered and privileged and a man child (calling men who are "too emotional" man children just reinforces the idea that men have to hide their emotions to be respected as a self actualized adult).

Male inclusive gender equality is about asking why its so normal to use the male gender to refer to something being done in a bad way. (bro gamers, dude bros, mansplain, manspread, the attempt to do the same with bernie bros because the bros reclaimed it for themselves. the "bro vote").

Male inclusive gender equality is about not getting so caught up trying to prove women had some specific and exclusive victim-hood WRT to rape that you accidentally(assuming undeserved good faith) erase 80% of male victims and set back anti-rape advocacy 10 years.

only reason people hate trans men is because they see them as female anyway

Some do, yes, and hate them for it, call them "traitors". others do and accuse them of trying to escape female oppression or gain male privilege

Tell me, which "enemy" have trans men now sided with to be called traitors?

Do you not see how it still requires misandry to work? It still requires seeing men as the enemy to view trans men as traitors to that enemy.

Others on the other hand see their masculinity as something to be feared, and will slowly find excuses to hate them for causing that fear. (Which would be solved, again, by addressing misandry and androphobia and never allowing it to fester among certain feminist circles in the 80s and 90s into what it became today)

[aguineapigcouldntdothis]

some of you hate to see trans men win, and you arent absolved of that because youre also a trans man. you have let your negative experiences cloud your judgement so heavily that all you feel is jealousy and disdain. youre convincing other trans men that it isnt even worth it to transition because theres no way theyll ever be seen as anything but women. at best, theyll be "ugly", masculine women, but never men.

sure, you can share your negative transitioning experiences and how reality differed from your expectations. but the second you start assuming that every other trans guy is doomed to never reach his goals, your argument becomes null. part of me wants to be nice and say that you did what you could with what you had, and that you still dont know what the future will hold. and for those of you who are good and kind people that is exactly what I believe. youre gonna be ok. youre capable of more than you know. but for those of you who use your shitty experiences to hurt others, i cant find a reason to be that kind. you are convincing trans men who would greatly benefit from transitioning that it isnt even worth it because theres no way he'll ever be happy with it. and some of yall are also convincing trans men to transition earlier than theyre able to handle this responsibility and watching it blow up in their faces. and you act like you helped him when all you did was make him go into debt and lose his family, and then still have to pause his transition bc he's literally unable to continue?

im not claiming that transitioning is easy. the trans guys you see who look like theyre living life on easy mode most likely put countless hours of work into that. i know i did, and i still am. but it is possible, and you should feel ashamed if you tell people that theyll never be happy with it.

i used to take a different approach to this but tbh I'm beyond tired of this type of person. you are so so against seeing other people be happy that you think it's a personal attack. youre shown endless kindness and you throw it back in the faces of the people who would go through hell for you. at some point you just need to be told to shut the fuck up. anyway i care a lot more about helping trans men achieve their dreams than pandering to the sensitivies of the few who can literally never be content.

[thedandelionresistance]

Intersex transneufemmasc here, @luxiomahariel is right. AFAB transfem and AMAB transmasc are NOT intersex-exclusive. Any prescriptivist argument about what the "real" or "true" definition of any part of womanhood is fundamentally rooted in ra//dical feminism, even with a decidedly non-radfe//m caveat added in to "protect" a marginalized group.

It's true to some extent that "AFAB transfem" is not an identity. Transfem is the identity, AFAB is incorrectly assumed to be or used as an adjective modifying transfem, when it is actually an event that happened to you at birth with no correlation to your anatomy nor gender presentation that affects your relationship to your transfemininity.

However, taking a word for word T//ERF argument about what a "woman" is, adding "trans" in front of every instance of the word "woman", and then saying "but actually as long as you're this intersex to ride this doesn't apply to you" is just a different flavor of bioessentialism and gender essentialism. By insisting that you must meet a certain standard of being physically non-dyadic (whether genetically, hormonally, at a direct macro-anatomical level wrt sex characteristics, or any other form of intersex), is in fact insisting that there is a particular way transfemininity can look, but broadening the category slightly. It also typically results in sorting intersex people into "perisex-AMAB-adjacent-enough" and "too-perisex-female-adjacent", either through physical features or based on the gendered experiences someone had while growing up and being raised.

It also defines a subset of womanhood/feminine genders (specifically, the intersection of womanhood/femininity, transness, and intersex identity), as based around the suffering and struggle and oppression one had to face to get there.

Using status-quo-"hater"s arguments, someone with a subtle genetic intersex variation without outward nondyadic sex characteristics who was raised female can never be transfem, someone whose parents started raising them as a boy but immediately accepted that they were a woman the instant they were old enough to understand and express gender (since they were never treated as anything other than a woman from the moment womanhood was applicable to them)* can never be transfem, and so on - unless there's just a blanket rule of "if you're intersex in any way, you can do whatever you want forever", which then arbitrarily denies the transfemininity where some perisex snd intersex people have experientially identical lives and internal relationships with their gender (such as in the case of intersex identities that can go undetected for a person's entire life, and therefore be functionally identical to a perisex person's life other than the unknown invisibility of their identity).

(Note: it's pretty rare for a person who was assigned FEMALE at birth rather than MALE to be raised as a boy, this is more likely to apply to an intersex transfem who was AMAB. Not unheard of, but a pretty rare reason to identify as AFAB transfem.)

You can see which it might be in cases such as perisex AFAB people being raised as boys by abusers or cults being attacked for using an "intersex exclusive" term, while AFAB intersex people with outwardly perisex-female-typical characteristics who are raised as women are either denied the term that is for intersex people for being "too perisex"/"not intersex enough" or arbitrarily allowed to use the word despite not having any of the experiences determined to "count" as an intersex AFAB transfem experience.

"AFABs who want to be trans girls" is also a transradfem dogwhistle. Besides being dripping with the misogyny transradfems define transfemininity around and the mixed bio-/gender-essentialism and intersexism of simultaneously treating AFAB as a coherent biological or legitimate social category while also erasing intersex AFAB people (Remember, bigots know they are contradicting themselves. They simply don't care if it's useful to them.), it is commonly used by people who appoint themselves arbiters and gatekeepers of intersex and transfem identity alike, who do not speak for the majority of either community and who often rebinarize intersex identity into male and female intersex. The vast majority of these people are perisex, with a few, typically self-hating or "the leopard won't eat my face" token intersex hangers-on who temporarily benefit from throwing their own community under the bus to gain conditional acceptance for as long as they are useful as a token.

Because yes, this is also harmful to intersex people. It is harmful to intersex people who have a sense of their internal identity, but do not yet know they are intersex - whether because they are uneducated or misinformed about what counts as intersex despite having nonnormative outwardly visible sexual characteristics, or because they are not aware that they have an intersex variation entirely. It is harmful to intersex people who may have faced abuse, bullying, or oppression, such as medical or even community gatekeeping from outliers within the intersex community, and don't feel confident identifying as intersex - especially if you demand people must do so in order to be able to identify as transfem. It will hurt the people not able to safely openly identify as intersex (even where they might be able to safely identify as trans).

The idea that it's primarily people who want to "look traditionally masculine" who are perisex and use the AFAB transfem label is a misrepresentation at best and a particularly odious and ass-pulled strawman at worst. While it's not untrue that rarely, perisex AFAB transfem people happen to want features typically considered more traditionally masculine, it's more complicated than associating transfemininity generally with features they consider masculine.

Sometimes the desire for those features is entirely unrelated to their transfem identity or even related to the masc part of an identity such as "transfemmasc". Sometimes it's related to butch identity tied to their transfemininity. Sometimes it's because they consider those features feminine in the exact same way some perisex AMAB transfems and trans women do. The reasons as in the examples are often far more complex and not rooted in transmisogyny if there is any relation, and all experiences that some AMAB transfems share. Far more often, the people who were assigned female at birth who are using the transfem label and are perisex have experiences such as:

-being multigender and having that experience inherently queer their experience of femininity and womanhood, because "manwoman" does not match the gender of assigned female at birth. nor does any component of "genderfluid" when, even when experiencing only one of the genders they are fluid between at a time, the genderfluidity itself changes the nature of each individual gender

-being a demigirl, a feminine xenogender, or even transitioning towards femininity as someone who was previously a masculine, androgenous, neutral, or otherwise gendered woman. also, transitioning towards a feminine nonwomanhood, such as your gender going from butch dyke to femboy or a femme man (yes, you can be a transfem trans man or transfemmasc, just as you can be a transmasc trans woman or transmascfem)

-being an introject or syskid in a plural system, where you may have soulbonded or joined a gateway system from your original life, where you were born a different sex or identity or born into the system with an internally intersex body (for example, we have several headmates like this. one canonically has a different intersex variation than our body does in their source. another simply formed with non-triadic sexual characteristics (they're also not human, hence the use of nontriadic, and are intersex by the cultural norms of their species' society)

-for that matter, all manner of alterhumans and nonhumans alike, who may have had different bodies in past or parallel lives, experience endelic or otherwise body-identity related harmless delusions, and so on

(People who consistently rage about not shutting down or talking over minorities about their oppression and experiences are very quick to shut down and talk over plural, alterhuman, and delusional people about our own experiences, even those of us who are notably also bodily intersex within this shared reality. It really reveals that it was never about centering vulnerable and suppressed minority voices, but about centering themselves.)

(It also, particularly when all these groups mentions face significant sanist oppression, is directly perpetuating and participating in that oppression, by defining what is an acceptable and allowed identity that these people can claim as both real and valid, as well as by denying these groups autonomy, historically one of the primary ways we've been oppressed. It's one thing to talk about different experiences - though this can also often devolve into denial of exomemories or exotrauma, something that on a neuropsychological level is registered as real by the bodymind indistinguishable from memories and trauma in this reality - but this is also often reductive and exclusionary to the non-monolithic intersex community that doesn't share these non-universal experiences that they are defining intersex identity around.)

It's also worth briefly noting that reality checking or fakeclaiming delusional people, regardless of whether the belief is harmful or not to anyone, is itself directly harmful to the delusional person unless they've explicitly consented to it, full stop. You are doing direct IMMEDIATE harm to them if you do so without their express, uncoerced/manipulated permission.

- This is also not an experience I can speak on personally, but the masculinization of some women of color and feminization of some men of color, especially where the lines between perisex and intersex blur, may be a factor for some people. It's also a complex situation entirely - because the entire definition of intersex is based around white dyadic standards. I debated including this at all, because I don't want to tokenize people of color, but wanted to bring up that how gender and sex and race all interact is important to acknowledge and to listen to people of color about. Nonwhite people are not always treated as their assigned gender at birth, sometimes to the point of feeling they have to transition towards it, from what I've heard from my friends. And intersex variations are underdiagnosed in people of color even in spite of being based around deviations from white perisex female and male standard bodies.

(People also forget that perisex AFAB and AMAB are a range of bodies and significantly wider range of experiences, and that intersex is an extremely wide variety of bodies and experiences basically encompassing everything not within the range of the dyadic sexes. There is absolutely a threshold at which it can be unclear whether someone is simply towards the end of the perisex range, or just outside of it.)

In any case, the experiences of perisex AFAB transfems (and much of this also applies similarly to AMAB transmascs, who are hypererased much the same way AFAB transmascs are, only compounded by the hypererasure of AMAB nonbinary/nontransfems. This is in part because of demonization of any perceived maleness or masculinity in transradfem spaces where it is treated as an impurity or contaminating aspect of gender, and in part because the centering and defense of (white, ontologically harmless and vulnerable victim-gendered womanhood) is crucial to upholding patriarchal gender standards and colonial racial oppression. But that's part of a much larger, more complicated conversation even than this).

At the end of the day, it's just a form of ladder-pulling to deny people the right to identify as transfem, and furthermore, it relies on circular logic. Deciding who can identify as transfem and therefore is allowed to define transfem and therefore is allowed to decide who fits the definition of transfem and who therefore can identify as transfem effectively is used to justify not letting anyone they've defined as a "non-transfem" define transfem in a way that includes their transfemininity.

It's the exact same way TER//Fs use eternally goalpost-moving definitions of women to exclude trans women from being "real women" and therefore having the "right" to define "real womanhood". All exclusion relies on this.

(I will instablock anyone who goes "oH bUt wHaT aBoUt rAciAL/eThNiC/cULtUrAL iDeNtiTiEs aNd aPpRoPriAtiOn". That is both fallacious and racist. Systemic racial oppression and gendered oppression are not the same thing, and you are not here to have a nuanced conversation about cultural appropriation vs sharing, open vs closed cultures and their exceptions (such as appropriation from primarily open cultures, or exceptions to joining closed cultures in good faith as determined by those peoples. I have not yet met a person of color, jewish person, muslim, or even nonwestern white person who has not said "stop it, you're being racist/antisemitic/islamophobic/xenophobic", in all the literal thousands of interactions I've had with these groups of people on this specific issue.)

Anyway, I could add stuff about the conflation of transfem with trans woman and the way this simultaneously erases nonbinary identities and treats them as "trans woman lite" (further contributing to AMAB nonbinary hypererasure, as well), about the way that someone's personal relationship between gender and sex can be intertwined, but how sex has literally nothing to do with gender in any way at a general/universal level and that the vast majority of people who claim it does are doing sex=gender, trans edition levels of reductivism. (Note: not all people are, but where some nuance exists it lacks depth, effectively being gilding on a shitcake.)

I don't know if status-quo-"hater" is speaking over people who hold an entirely different identity or a shared identity, and can't be arsed to check. I honestly don't care either way.

All forms and experiences of AFAB transfemininity and AMAB transmasculinity are valid. I will not debate nor entertain any responses trying to convince me otherwise (I actually won't even see them before they are removed where possible and you are blocked, thanks to help screening my notifications). There is no way in this universe that you will convince me that believing people about their own internal identity and experiences is somehow the bigoted option and that actually the people controlling the labels that people can and can't use are the good guys who are just victims of the horrible meanies who are... minding their own business and going about their lives. All cops are bastards includes label cops (and I say this as a disabled person who nearly died due to police violence, so I don't give one singular flying shit about anyone telling me I'm "co-opting" that phrase).

Block me if you don't like it or whatever. Usually I ask people to not include my username in the screenshot to avoid harassment, but despite trusting my currently four followers maximum that will see this to not harass any of the screenshotted people, I can admit that would be hypocrisy, so like, do whatever.

Tl;dr Linguistic prescriptivism and bio and gender essentialism harms everyone involved, including intersex people, and also relies on contradictory and faulty logic to even try to justify itself. People can use whatever gender labels they want forever.

[hp-confessions]

Re. The anon who called HP a misogynistic series. 

JKR is transphobic. She has used her platform to spread misinformation and personal attacks on trans people and women with unconfirmed DSD. She should absolutely be held accountable for that. That contradicts her feminism. But I don’t agree on your point about the books.

“Jkr claims to be such feminist, however, her books are solely based on male friendships or male/female friendships.”

Yeah because the main character is male and the story is from his perspective so of course it focused on his friendships. 

Yes, we get to see mild friendships like Luna and Ginny or Hermione and Ginny.

Luna is a character who is ostracized and bullied. She doesn’t have any friends until the DA so her friendship with Ginny and Hermione isn’t mild. She has a mural of their faces on her ceiling. That’s how meaningful they are. 

 Why couldn’t Hermione have a group of girlfriends she hung out with when the boys got annoying?? Couldn’t she have a female friend or two that she really got along with?

This is an essential part of Hermione’s story. She starts book 1 as shy, nerdy, and not having friends. After the troll incident she has a connection with Harry and Ron. She doesn’t have connections with girls intentionally because it brings her and the boys closer. JKR wrote her based on her own experiences of being plain and bookish and not having that make for popularity in school. 

We know Ginny is popular and I’m assuming Lily was somewhat popular too, who are their friends then (don’t say Neville and Luna because she had to have more friends than that! And I refuse to believe Snape was Lily’s only friend)?? Why wasn’t there any mention about Harry’s godmother?? Did Molly really never have any friends to let off some steam? The same thing with Tonks and Fleur?? Why couldn’t Hermione have a group of girlfriends she hung out with when the boys got annoying?? Couldn’t she have a female friend or two that she really got along with?

Again this series of from Harrys perspective. There is a lot we don’t know about these characters because he isn’t around to see it. Ginny is in a different year than Harry so it’s not like there’s any reason for him to interact with her friends. Also yeah she’s popular but most people only have a few friends who are true intimate real friendships so saying Neville and Luna isn’t irrelevant. 

Lily is seen is a couple of flashbacks that were Snape’s memories so it’s biased to only show them. There’s no evidence that he has a godmother. Would be nice if he did but having a godparent that wasn’t in prison would’ve led to him not being raised by the Dursleys which fundamentality changes the story. 

Molly is only seen when she is around Harry and when Harry is there she is also raising her children. Ask any stay at home mother with 7 kids who lives in the middle of the country if they have an active social life. We do not see how she spends her time when the kids are at school because it’s not Harry’s purview. 

Fleur is only even seen as the champion and bill fiancé. Would it have been nice to give her more of a backstory, yes, but it’s not relevant to Harry’s story. 

Tonks is the same as being seen through the lens of an auror and an order member because that is how she interacts with Harry. 

HP is a misogynistic series written by a self proclaimed feminist.

The women in Harry Potter are not myopic. They are allowed to not just fit into a single mold of womanhood. They are nerdy, brave, traumatized, optimistic, strong, fragile, good, evil, kind, cruel, conflicted, beautiful, plain, ugly, rational, or dreamers. 

We see them grieve, betray, rebel, make friendships, walk away from them, fight, lose, kill to protect and kill out of cruelty. We see them as sporty, frilly, ambitious and we see them evolve and grow up. 

I get that hating on JKR is standard practice and it breaks my heart to see who she has become but these books are such a part of how I and a lot of people grew up and a lot of these female characters are inspirations. 

~

[eccentricphilosoph]

This is a reply I saw a transwoman make on post of a question by a transwoman. It’s a side that a lot of people who are LGBT allies don't see. Many people who have been trans for many years now are feeling rejected by either side. I've seen more and more people who are talking about this. It's sad and these people deserve a listen. I've even heard some people who are more afraid than they have been before of the uprising of people against trans people due to the unrest that "activists" have caused (this is in their own words, don't shoot the messenger).

There are actual trans people who are being called both transphobic and being called predators on each side. It's just not right.

Called transphobic for challenging the idea that trans women are women, for example. Some believe trans women/men are trans women/men as a separate entity from cis women/men in terms of experience and biology and don't see this as a disadvantage. Of course, they should still be seen as women/men in their daily lives and many shouldn’t have to identify as “trans” openly when it’s not necessary. This is something to think on as trans people still need a safe space too.

*again, don't shoot the messenger. These aren't my beliefs. I'm just stating what these people are saying and that I believe they shouldn't be invalidated by either side, assuming their reasoning is sound. I'm encouraging myself and others to think more critically as I always do on my page.

Furthermore, while I fully understand how many think this sort of thinking will cause those who oppose trans people overall to invalidate or attack trans people, I don't think it's a reason to block out the voices of trans people who maintain these thoughts and feelings. If they feel it would cause them to be more unsafe, I doubt they would express these thoughts. I know this isn't a one size fits all situation, so please don't think of this in an "all or nothing" sort of way.

I’m open to listening to trans people who have different ideas and perspectives moreso than someone who isn’t trans, even if they’re an “ally”.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

Kind of a weird one, but as a multigender intersex person, I've experienced this weird combo of transmisogyny/transandrophobia/exorsexism/transmultiphobia/intersexism where people essentially demand I "pick one" between transfem, transmasc, transneutral, etc.

When I focus on being transfem, I'm not "allowed" to be transmasc, and vice versa.

In some spaces, I get accused of being a whiny AFAB who is "appropriating transfemininity, wants to feel more oppressed, and just has PCOS" (never mind that the majority of the intersex community agrees that PCOS with hyperandrogenism is considered fully intersex, with the medical effort to deny that being considered medical oppression that only serves to divide the community and keep people ignorant to their own intersex identity; as well as the fact that a variation functionally identical to PCOS in people assigned female at birth has been found to occur in people assigned male at birth, and is considered the same thing by scientists).

In others I get accused of being a dangerous or self-hating AMAB who is "appropriating transfemininity, wants to feel more oppressed, and is basically a cis man who wants to feel special".

For some reason I've never been accused of appropriating transmasculinity.

The vastness of my pangenderfluidity is reduced to telling me to pick between manhood and womanhood, all nonbinary identities either erased or used to label me with whatever assumptions about my assigned sex and anatomy they find most useful to use to attack me, often simultaneously misgendering and malgendering me. When I focus on being nonbinary, typically that's when people label me AFAB too - often the same people who either tokenize AMAB nonbinary people or assume they're self-hating trans women who just haven't "figured it out yet". These people typically treat nonbinary as "woman lite", but it changes between "trans woman lite" or "cis woman lite" based on their assumptions of your assigned gender/sex and anatomy.

People demand I disclose the gender/sex that were assigned to be at birth, despite the erasure of being neither female nor male being a form of epistemic injustice I've dealt with my whole life, which had led to coercive medical violence against me. In one case, being manipulated into going on estrogen based birth control as part of my abuse ended up badly worsening my existing suicidality, and nearly killed me. They feel entitled to know if I'm "male intersex" or "female intersex" so they can decide if I'm "girl nonbinary" or "boy nonbinary".

I'm also ALWAYS labeled as "tme" by strangers, despite having experienced transmisogyny for the outward signs of my intersex condition even before experiencing overt intersexism. They insist that this is "just intersexism" despite my detailed explanation of why and how it is transmisogyny, tell me to "read Whipping Girl" (but largely don't know who Emi Koyama even is -_-), and decide what I have experienced for me despite my long and detailed descriptions of my experiences with various types of oppression and violence.

One particularly transandrophobic AND transmisogynistic white knighting transmasc person kept screenshotting my posts but cutting them right above the part where I explicitly said I'm intersex and transneufemmasc to argue that transandrophobia "isn't real", relying on his followers not seeking out my posts to ignore the fact that he was directly talking over a transfem person explaining why the concept transandrophobia is NOT transmisogynistic. Honestly, while I've encountered as many shitty people in the transmasc community as in any other marginalized group, he is the only person I've ever encountered who was legitimately mansplaining transmisogyny to transfems (while misgendering us).

It's not like this is super unique - I've faced corpoableism from the neurodisabled community and neuroableism/sanism from the physically disabled community. I've faced endomisia from sysmeds and endomisic bigots, as well as ableism and pluralmisia from some of the more inclusive plural community (though far less so and not in the way endomisic people accuse endogenic systems of). It's honestly to me part of a wider cultural problem of not believing people about their experiences and insisting that having experienced a form of oppression gives you the authority to say that people with identities different from yours DON'T experience that form of oppression.

People have every right to claim to experience a form of oppression personally, generally have the right and make accurate claims about their identity being widely affected by a form of oppression, can sometimes have the right and make accurate claims about people outside their identity being widely affected by a form of oppression... but will usually be in the wrong and just plain wrong about any group NOT experiencing a form of oppression. This is true even if they're making the claim about their own group (such as transmascs who deny the existence of transandrophobia) but even more so about experiences they have very little knowledge of and no authority over because they've literally never experienced them.

They're using the inverse fallacy, otherwise known as denying the antecedent, where someone takes the statement "if p, then q" and uses it to claim that "if not p, then not q" is true. So as an example, "If you're transfem, you experience transmisogyny" then is claimed to make "if you're not transfem, you don't experience transmisogyny" true. I've experienced a lot of the same, particularly in slur reclamation discourse, in the disabled community, where people will decide that only x group of disabled people face a type of bigotry or specific slur and rely on confirmation bias by circle filing every piece of evidence that contradicts them.

This also typically causes a related issue, where people will claim "well maybe you experienced it, but it wasn't aimed at you and therefore hurt the people it was meant to hurt more". I mean, it's blatantly untrue that someone a bigot or systemic form of oppression is affecting is "not the target", just because they are using the "wrong form" of bigotry or oppression to hurt you - they were trying to hurt you, so you're the target, period. But these people will also outright deny and fakeclaim any of your experiences that don't fit your narrative, making up a guy to get mad about and accusing you of things you've never said and/or done.

When talking about how neurodisability can cause actual physical accessibility issues (such as severe scent-based sensory issues making someone have a severe meltdown as effectively barring them from an area as an allergic reaction to the same scents, despite not having issues with, say, a lack of a ramp; as well as being equally dangerous as meltdowns can involve serious and potentially even life threatening self injury) I was called an abled person who wanted to feel oppressed, despite being an ambulatory wheelchair user who is largely housebound and sometimes bedbound due to multiple physical disabilities. I've been told my ADHD cannot be my most disabling condition or that if it is, I must be high functioning and low support needs, despite my executive dysfunction often bordering on catatonia and making me need a caregiver and multiple other support providers such as case managers and CBRS workers. I've even been told that when I got called the r slur, they must have been trying to say I was unintelligent, despite the people who called me that growing up explicitly using it to mean that I was an intelligent "gifted" kid with severe social deficits - and accused of using it negatively against myself despite only ever having used it positively to own that it's okay not to be smart, particularly when my fluctuating cognitive disabilities are at their most severe.

The transphobia is the same way. I've been accused of being a cis woman who just wants to feel special, 2010 transmed style, and being a man forcing his way into women's spaces, 2020-terf style. I've been told I have no right to reclaim the slurs that apply to me, from cuntboy to tranny to shemale. As mentioned above, people feel entitled to demand information about my medical history (including the label forced on me by intersexism), my genital configuration, my secondary sex characteristics, what gender I was raised as (something I'd actually like to talk about!) and so on, to determine what kinds of oppression I'm "allowed" to talk about experiencing.

They go further to claim I am perisex and/or cis when I talk about having headmates in our system who have a complicated relationship between our body's sex, their sex in the innerworld, their assigned gender/sex at birth or formation, their gender and relationship to transness or cisness, exotrauma/exomemories relating to their gender and/or species, and so on. Even if this wasn't pluralmisic, I absolutely have a right to weigh in as someone who is bodily intersex and trans.

Nevermind the fits thrown when I tell people that both my manhood and womanhood are trans, but my genderfluidity is what makes me cistrans as a faekin/fae endel.

All of this while I am in the one barely purple haven in a deep red state, forced off my HRT due to a state law denying Medicaid coverage for it as a disabled person on SSI (who was paying all bills while my partner fought her denials until May of last year, and then had debts to settle from that time period), facing dangerous transphobia when I am well enough to leave the house that also significantly impacts my medical care (which includes a decade of medical neglect and abuse and psychiatric abuse that has elements of RAMCOA - specifically mind control and organized abuse, and what I refer to as "conditioning" which is a form of semi-intentional programming using textbook programming techniques without explicitly being aware of intending to "program" but while purposely using them to control thoughts and behavior), have gotten sicker and sicker and had my quality of life get flushed down the toilet from lack of access to everything from medical care to mobility aids to a public transit system that isn't such utter ass it takes 3 busses and a 4 hour roundtrip just to reach the nearest walmart about 7 miles away from us, while my family does that middle class white liberal thing of pretending to accept our identities when forced to for optics while trying to manipulate us out of making certain gender affirming medical decisions (my mom said she'd hate for me to have a part of my anatomy removed, for example, despite the primary reason being literal cancer prevention while gender affirmation is just a secondary bonus).

I have gotten rape and assault threats both IRL and online (sometimes directly after talking about my experiences with infant CSA and teen sexual harassment). I have been literally doxxed by kiwifarms.

I've been pedojacketed and called a predator and a groomer despite having such bad POCD I can barely stand to be around people under 18 and avoid it wherever possible, and suicide baited and told that people wished my previous attempts had succeeded.

I've been told I deserved every form of abuse I've ever experienced and that I'm the actual abuser by complete strangers.

I've been told that I must not be trans because I'm just traumatized, that I'm delusional, that I'm a narcissist and sociopath (we do have trauma and schizophrenia and some headmates have NPD and ASPD - alongside BPD and HPD, from our trauma, and all of which is neither inherently harmful or more likely to make any of us abusers, on top of being well managed with healthy coping skills.

We've had derogatory anti-addict language used against us (we have struggled with impulsive/compulsive behaviors related to our ADHD, though not substance abuse, but that's not how they are using it anyway), told our symptoms of hyperverbality which can often be disabling are a form of violence against others, and fakeclaimed and told we can't use our own language over and over and over again.

We've been accused of co-opting terms ranging from transfem to nonverbal (we have headmates who are permanently nonverbal and nonspeaking who sometimes get frontstuck for extended periods of time, and view nonverbality as a spectrum of varying experiences and struggles - not as in a spectrum from more to less verbal, but more like the autism spectrum which is vast and complex), and of being a privileged oppressor Frequently the accusations have come from people whose experiences with transness or disability have led to, by their own explanation, less violence, more access, and better treatment than we've faced, though not always. As an example, "I haven't experienced this form of neuroableism from a diagnosis I share with you, it hasn't disabled me in this way that it has disabled you, and therefore it can't be significantly disabling or cause significant systemic ableism/oppression" is a tired refrain at this point. Being told we were tokenizing ourselves or even using stigmatized conditions/identities that we "have no idea about" that are our direct personal experience was at one point a daily occurrence.

We keep going back and forth between ableism and transphobia in part because they're not separable for us - because y'know, intersectionality - but also bc we've literally split multiple headmates due to harassment campaigns and cyberbullying, and simply do not have access to the majority of our worst memories of facing transphobia both online and IRL right now.

But we have faced all the textbook transandrophobia and transmisogyny - the misgendering and malgendering, being treated as predatory invaders both as a trans woman and trans man and as hysterical whiny bitches as a trans woman and trans man, the standard baseline of sexual harassment and threats of violence, rape (and forced impregnation/detransition), and death, the fakeclaiming, the casual cruelty, the trauma, the lack of stability and security, the demonization of our manhood and denial of our womanhood and experiences with misogyny, the infantilization (which people forget is fundamentally used to justify denying someone's autonomy to them - in that, it functions highly similarly to sanism), the isolation and being pushed out of community and lack of safety both inside and outside of the community.

Tbh, we might have more to share at some point but like, point is, that's just the visible part of the iceberg currently. That's our experiences with transandrophobia and everything connected to it that we can access right now.

.

[redditreceipts]

I read your pinned post and was wondering, when you say you support dysphoric transitioned people as long as they don't use opposite sex spaces, what are your feelings on trans people who are "stealth"? Either for safety reasons or convenience or what have you. I'm new to radfem tumblr and am still forming opinions myself.

hey :) so this is an interesting question.

I think first of all, there should be some kind of legislation that takes away civil rights from sex offenders. Sex offenders, for example, should be prohibited from going into so-called "vulnerable spaces" like changing rooms and bathrooms (for any sex), places with a lot of children etc. This should also be supervised closely, of course. That would prevent males who are sex offenders from going into women's spaces at all. (Sex offenders also shouldn't be allowed to transition imo)

Secondly, I think that there are two types of sex-segregated spaces. One I would call the kind of space where you can choose to go or not to go, like for example a convention for lesbians, a gay bar for only gay men, a women's only event etc. There is no good reason in my opinion for a transgender person, stealth or not, to go to any of those events for the sex that they do not belong to. You can freely choose to not go to a lesbian's event as a straight trans-identified male, so I would assume that it isn't for you and you can go to another open event instead of going into another person's space.

But there is also the second type of sex-segregated space; the type of space where you can't just choose to not go. This would be things like public bathrooms, prisons, changing rooms etc. And there, I think that we should work on creating third spaces for people who are transitioning, like single-stall bathrooms or changing rooms, or an extra section in the men's prison for men who are likely to be attacked by other men (like gay men or transitioning males). So what should be done in the meantime? 1. we have to work on the main problem here, which is male violence. There has to be a legal system in place that consequently punishes males who attack transwomen because they don't want them in their restrooms 2. there has to be a more realistic concept of "passing". I see mtfs on reddit all the time talking on how much they love passing, but then I click on their profiles and they don't even remotely pass 😭

So okay, after these points have been adressed, I think that a person should use the space that causes the least amount of upset. I don't think that there is a perfect response because in this society, there is still a lot of bigotry and male violence.

[animentality]

Please stop intentionally strawmanning transphobes it's actually so bad for trans people

I'm not straw manning transphobes, they're clowning in MY inbox and in my posts, lol.

You think I dragged those arguments out of my ass?

Terfs call me a dress wearing pedophile every time I so much as suggest trans people don't deserve the shit they get.

That's why I make a post saying that to terfs, wearing a dress is somehow shameful or embarrassing for a "man."

Because for some fucking reason, they're just convinced all trans women are just "men wearing dresses" and they're all pedophiles.

The fuck are you doing, assuming I'm the one who's attacking terfs just for fun, lol?

Anything I've ever said about terfs came from some bullshit they SENT ME.

Or commented on an otherwise random post about how gender is fluid.

This fucking ask, man...

[perennialiris]

If someone asks me whether I pass, what I think they mean is whether people who don’t know me can tell that I’m trans without being explicitly informed. Can you tell by looking? Or maybe hearing. I don’t have a great voice. It’s probably not a binary thing—more like, what percentage of people do you pass for? Maybe only 5% of people notice you’re trans and the other 95% don’t. Maybe it’s 50–50.

I don’t know the answer for me because it doesn’t matter, because I have the incredible privilege of living somewhere that it doesn’t matter. Use your imagination for a minute: what if every single person I encounter knew that I was trans without a doubt? Would that be bad?

In some places, it would be, because you’d be mistreated for it. Harassed, discriminated against, maybe even physically attacked in the street. But what if you weren’t? What if people just thought “hmm, I think that woman is trans”, and then nothing really happened? Because they don’t hate trans people?

There are really two kinds of passing.

“I’m a biological male and I want people to assume, at a glance, that I’m a cis woman” is the traditional one, the main one people talk about.

But there’s also an in-between level that’s just as important to me, maybe more: “Sure, I’m a biological male, but I want people to be able to tell, at a glance, that I’m somebody whom they should treat like a woman”. That could mean thinking I’m a cis woman, and it could mean being able to tell I’m trans but treating me like a woman anyway, because trans women are women.

If ‘passing’ means that people who I encounter call me ‘she’ and generally treat me the way they would treat females, then I guess I pass. But I don’t know how many of those people are calling me ‘she’ because they can tell I’m a trans woman, and that’s how one would address a trans woman.

I think the reason ‘passing’ was such a goal in the past is because only by having people think you’re cis would they treat you like a woman. If you live in an accepting, understanding community, then that’s not the case. And so, it stops mattering that much.

I think our goal, in a way, is to make it so that passing is no longer so goddamn crucial.

[nooneparticular17]

hey im so sorry but your age is very apparent in your thing about trans hcs, you have misinterpreted the pattern due to lack of context, i am sure i did the same thing when i was 19 so no worries 🥲

the increase in canon male transfem hcs (you used to get attacked for that, which was bad) is largely backed by trans women who. again, used to get attacked for doing this. by people who insisted you could only hc characters as already having transitioned. it was for the longest time, for some reason, considered transphobic to go "hey i think this character wouldn't have their whole gender figured out yet and would transition later on"

the lack of transmasc (and tbh transfem) hcs for female characters is more bc people don't care about them and don't have hcs about them at all. male characters are more popular and thus get more frequently transed in both directions

if it is unclear we Used To only ever hc characters of any gender as transitioning to their presented gender off-screen before canon events. and it sucked so bad man we don't wanna go back to that <:/

hey! thanks for clarifying!

i haven't been in queer fandom spaces for that long so you're right haha i didn't really think of how it was in the past. and that sucks that it was hateful like that then, so ofc i don't want it to go back to that.

i also kind of assumed that transwomen do approve since i imagine most people having trans headcanons are trans themselves.

and i do see the appeal in headcannoning a character as a closeted/not transitioned trans character - ofc i do, as a closted trans guy haha

i like that you pointed out that the tranmasc and transfems hc for female characters is much less, that is also an interesting thing imo. why is that? why are male characters more popular? food for thought (you don't have to answer ofc but I'd also be happy to discuss)

hope i didn't come off condescending in any way, genuinely just like looking into things

and thanks for being so nice about it :]

[dianight]

Not directed at anyone in particular

...but rather because I keep seeing related stuff constantly.

Once you change your mentality, once you internalize that being a trans woman is not a bad thing but rather something good and to be desired, it'll be as if you automatically learn a new language, or more accurately learn how to decypher a code in front of you.

Said code being a metaphor, obviously, for the clear disdain and way more often than I'd like or I'd ever imagined outright hatred that people seem to have for trans women.

You read something that's palpably transmisogynistic and it's undoubtedly clear what the person who wrote wants to say, but needs a few logic jumps and beating around the bush since stating it plainly will be too blunt. You think, "am I reading this in bad faith or is this person hating on trans women?" You spend a few minutes trying to come up with some explanation of how this person typed what can only be interpreted as "being a trans woman is HORRIBLE" without spelling it out and eventually you accept that it's just transmisogyny, no matter how you spin it.

You keep seeing similar shit. You get literal poll data that screams what you already know: the average (ignoring sampling bias for a moment) tumblr user thinks being a trans woman is bad. You keep seeing harrassment campaings by hate groups targeting trans women. You keep seeing them get driven out of platforms that some (many?) of them need to get funds to live. You keep seeing absurd escalation only and only ever against transfems. You keep seeing the same blogs (already blocked) that start witch hunts or pile on them reblogging funny memes as usual. You keep seeing random trans women getting terminated for no reason, for minor reasons that literally any other demographic can get away with, for being the target (not instigator) of those same witch hunts.

Sure, telling people off can get out of hand after you get hatemail for days, weeks, months and maybe even years. Trans women are expected to always be ready to debate our right to exist at any given moment and endure all the random poking and insults all the while remaining civil. [<- See that? A bit of trickery, not quite a lie but not true either. Trans women are NOT expected to do all that. That's simply an excuse for when the time comes when a woman tells some random anon off, she gets reported and terminated. We are just illustrating the point about seeing the "code" here.]

And after many years of seeing the vitriol that gets thrown our way, after seeing all the excuses (the same ones, over and over), after seeing who gets driven out of communities and why, and who drives us out; after you see groups of women clearly explain "this happens because transmisogyny"and then being ignored, silenced and attacked; you eventually realize that you and the people who hate you just have a different perspective when it comes to trans women.

You (I) think that being a trans woman is good, and at worst a neutral aspect of who you are. Those who you (I) have seen over the years harassing, attacking and mocking trans women just think that being a trans woman is bad at best, and at worst it's something to be erradicated. They make it very clear if you pay a minimum of attention to their actions.

So whenever I see reblogs complaining about callouts and shit; well, you can't really stop them from happening (as an individual) but it does make me happy that I never see them since I block anyone who reblogs them. Whenever I see discourse (<- not my word) about eggs (<- recent), about calling yourself transfem when you are afab (<- less recent), about whatever fetish some popular (<- I assume) trans woman just happens to be into and magically it becomes the most terrible thing you can possibly get the hots for; I see it for what it truly is:

Excuses to hate on trans women. And in order to love every trans woman before it's too late people need to stop hating them first.

[kaleido-write]

Part 3 chapter 3

If I feel like the panels aren't well executed I'll say it so until I say otherwise assume it's a well made panel .

Despite rusty trying to depict transwoman as innate savages she still depict them as quite calm individuals , also it still baffles me that the trans woman are the only truly hairy ones , so far no other characters has been showed with diverse hairyness

The antisemitism get worst in every panel , instead of feeling unsettling and scary it just feels grotesque and a déjà vu scenario that happened plenty of time trough media . They keep using ethnic traits to look demonizing as much as they can be .

The traits are all so exaggerated while all the women are pretty small ladies with no imperfections. It's really an attack to ethnic traits whether rusty realize it or not .

Following theses panels rusty will use the arguments that since some trans folks misgender and dehumanize transphobes it's ok to do the same . It is not, dehumanizing the people you don't like is dangerous for various reasons as it leads to hate crime and genocides in the worst cases (yes among the genocides and mass murder I include feminicides and queer genocide)

As for the second image I find it hypocritical from rusty and her fellow terfs to qualify any gnc men of trans woman and making fun of them , no they are not appropriating womanhood, they're normalizing the use of gendered things , gnc people exist outside of lesbians , rusty .

Rusty admit here ITS INSULTING TO NOT RESPECT SOMEONE PRONOUNS . Rusty is hypocritical until the end and she doesn't care because she has been conditioned into hateful beliefs. Yes hateful beliefs because so far I haven't met one terfs that can truly be respectful of people that disagree with them . Can trans people be hateful too as individuals? Of course . But terfs are radical . And in radicalism I don't know one movement that isn't fueled by thr Hate of something or someone .

Rusty was stubborn enough to keep demonize their traits instead of making the situation truly threatening. The ridiculous way they are portrayed overtake any message she meant to portray here as she cannot portray people in a respectful manner . You can't dehumanize someone and hope being taken seriously unless by people who hate theses people as well , you know you did a good job when regardless of the belief the scene is felt the way you meant to portray .

The amount of line lead to make us think she pushed her with force and quickly. It would've been better to put less lines in order to show properly how fast she touched her . And here again we are faced with blatant dehumanization . Not a good depiction of a scary situation.

...what ??? 😭😭 why is Jaden assaulting someone that did nothing . It doesn't make any sense ???

[coulsonlives]

Mkayy, I just saw the most insane post about a Trolls character make the rounds. As a queer person in fandom, that's a perfect example of how some people in fandom really gotta chill! Especially when most of those people are like in their early 20s. I have no horse in this race but even I think it's insane.

So this post said 'floyd and veneer' (two Trolls characters I assume, I don't watch Trolls lol) are 'gay coded, and to stop shipping floyd with women' because of that. Because 'representation is important'.

Really?? Are we really gonna do this virtue-signally, instant outrage BS for a millionth time??

This is a kid's show, the canon will literally always be there regardless of random fans changing things in the background! It doesn't affect representation, not where it matters. And if you act like it does, that's how you end up with incidents where gay, trans, and queer people write/draw oodles of gay characters, the same as they are in canon, but as soon as they change aspects of one hot-button character (for example floyd and veneer), maybe because they just don't wanna write/draw every single character as queer, people explode and harass em, because they think it's a big insult for representation and they're a horrible person and how dare they be homophobic etc etc. Meanwhile the fic in question has like 3 kudos and a comment.

Not to mention, if you need to educate people on why a character is gay coded, regardless of whether they are or not, that's just admitting to the fact there will be people who see them otherwise. An earring on the right ear? A het person will just see it as an earring!! This shit doesn't stand out to everyone. If you see it, great, but step off and stop attacking people for not seeing it. Nobody has a responsibility to look up details of a character to ensure/confirm it isn't symbolic of the queer community before their brain goes 'ooohh i ship these two characters!'

Is it disappointing someone changed a character who's canonically gay or gay coded or whatever? Yep! Is it worth screaming about and creating a hostile fandom space over, where people need to walk on eggshells? No.

No no no.

Fanfiction is transformative for a mfing reason. Fandom is supposed to encourage creativity. Don't be a dick to people. Oml.

[bilesproblems]

The problem is that you're queerphobic asf and then call anyone who disagrees with you a TERF even if they are transfemme or just in general trans themselves.

You're queerphobic, actually.

A massive part of what queerphobia is, is not understanding someone's identity and choosing to be reactionary and fight someone over your assumptions on what that means rather than ask them why they feel that way. Which you are demonstrating right now by saying whatever word vomit this shit was rather than "can you please explain how being a bi lesbian works?" Queerphobia also heavily involves not being willing to understand someone and their identity. If you were willing to understand, you would, because there is no good reason to not support mspec lesbians that exists, and the only way a person could be unsupportive of bi lesbians is if they're ignorant and don't understand yet, or if they're going out of their way to be gold stars by excluding SAM-using lesbians. The lack of understanding you are demonstrating now simply by saying we're queerphobic for being queer in a way you do not yet understand.

You see the label of bi lesbian. You do not care to inquire. You do not seek to understand. You assume "mspec/bi always includes attraction to men" and forget your history that proves lesbian wasn't ever intended to be exclusive, and sappho of lesbos herself was fucking bi, and so you attack us and call us lesbophobic based on your assumptions when all we did was understand our history better than you and not misgender every nonbinary person who doesn't identify whatsoever as a woman.

Not to mention, you aren't allowed to call yourself queer if you think the rules of labels are strict. They're not. They're loose and they're meant to overlap. That's the point of being queer, to break the rules. You are queerphobic because you are going against the fundamental principles of queerness itself. You have no right to use th word of the weirdos if you shun us. You have no claim to the label for the rule breakers if you think lesbians can't be men or like men because that's "breaking the rules."

It is also horribly queerphobic to be bilesbophobic because bilesbophobia overlaps with many flavors of queerphobia; biphobia, transphobia and enbyphobia, specifically, as well as broader queerphobia (the hatred of and discrimination against identities that are queer. Even those who support SOME queer people can be queerphobic.)

The TERF/Transphobia claims come from several facts

1. The ONE and ONLY reason that the lesbian label currently tends to describe EXCLUSIVE attraction to women and elsegender people is because of TERFS. TERFS decided women who liked men couldn't be lesbians. TERFS decided men were evil. They also tried to get rid of you, dear transfem anon, and both nonbinary lesbians and butches, for being too close to manhood. They didn't succeed, but they did manage to push mspec lesbians and transmasc/trans man lesbians out, and make the label exclusive. These TERFS also tried to separate lesbians from the rest of the queer community. They failed, thankfully.

You are not being called a TERF, but you are being told you are using TERF rhetoric and falling for things TERFS say and TERFS created.

2. Being anti mspec lesbians is the same as hating non-binary people. Even if you are nonbinary yourself, you are hurting yourself and your community. I am a lesbian, exclusively. I have no attraction to men. I am attracted to women and I am attracted to elsegender people. My boyfriend is androgyne, in fact. That is lesbian, but it is bi. You must either say nonbinary people are not included in the lesbian label, making people like me just bi, or that all nonbinary people are women, making me just a lesbian, to not support mspec lesbians. There is no other way to go about it.

3. Multigender people fucking exist. An exclusive lesbian can be attracted to a man if that man is a woman. And if they date, the lesbian could call herself bi or even pan because she's capable of being attracted to all genders, but only if the gender of woman is present.

I am dead certain all your information on bi lesbians is not from bi lesbians. Perhaps you were told it's for lesbians who like trans women. It's not. Or maybe it's because you think we don't accept trans men as real men? We do, we just also accept that sometimes trans men can feel disconnected from cis men and still feel connected to the lesbian label because of their AGAB. It doesn't mean trans men can't be straight. It just means we won't decide for them what label they want to use, if they wanna say that they're straight because they're men who like women or lesbian because historically, transmascs and trans men were accepted in the lesbian community and people who's experiences keep them connected to their AGAB, even if they don't identify with it, will have a different relationship with their labels.

Pipe down. You don't know what you're talking about. I only dignified you with a response to show off my writing abilities to my followers. I don't think you will even read this. I do not care. If you've seen how foolish and queerphobic you were, I'll forgive you, but until then, stay quiet and don't try to tell people things about their identity when you don't understand it and we do. You're arguing with a strawman that you made up and won't listen.

There is nothing queerphobic about acknowledging that you historically belonged in a label. There is nothing queerphobic about using 2 labels because you feel you are in between the two. There is nothing queerphobic about using the split attraction model. There is nothing queerphobic about not misgendering nonbinary people while still not excluding them from the lesbian label. There is nothing queerphobic about breaking rules. There is, however something deeply and inherently queerphobic about not accepting someone's identity simply because it doesn't make sense to you right off the bat. It's not wrong to want to understand before you just accept it, because at least you are open to understanding it, but to call someone queerphobic because you don't understand is exactly what homophobes do, it's exactly what transphobes do, and it's exactly what all queerphobes do.